These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
214 related items for PubMed ID: 28834824
1. Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements Using Ultrasonic Pachymetry, Anterior Segment OCT and Noncontact Specular Microscopy. Scotto R, Bagnis A, Papadia M, Cutolo CA, Risso D, Traverso CE. J Glaucoma; 2017 Oct; 26(10):860-865. PubMed ID: 28834824 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness with Ultrasound Pachymetry, Noncontact Specular Microscopy and Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography. Erdur SK, Demirci G, Dikkaya F, Kocabora MS, Ozsutcu M. Semin Ophthalmol; 2018 Oct; 33(6):782-787. PubMed ID: 29509052 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Accuracy of Cirrus HD-OCT and Topcon SP-3000P for measuring central corneal thickness. Calvo-Sanz JA, Ruiz-Alcocer J, Sánchez-Tena MA. J Optom; 2018 Oct; 11(3):192-197. PubMed ID: 28254359 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements Using Optical and Ultrasound Pachymetry in Glaucoma Patients and Elderly and Young Controls. Pillunat KR, Waibel S, Spoerl E, Herber R, Pillunat LE. J Glaucoma; 2019 Jun; 28(6):540-545. PubMed ID: 30855412 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of central corneal thickness in healthy eyes using ultrasound pachymetry, non-contact specular microscopy and a high-resolution Scheimpflug camera. Soulantzou K, Plakitsi A, Chalkiadaki E, Anastasopoulou M, Karmiris E. Int Ophthalmol; 2023 Feb; 43(2):363-370. PubMed ID: 35864284 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measured by Standard Ultrasound Pachymetry, Corneal Topography, Tono-Pachymetry and Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography. González-Pérez J, Queiruga Piñeiro J, Sánchez García Á, González Méijome JM. Curr Eye Res; 2018 Jul; 43(7):866-872. PubMed ID: 29634372 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison and evaluation of central corneal thickness using 2 new noncontact specular microscopes and conventional pachymetry devices. Bao F, Wang Q, Cheng S, Savini G, Lu W, Feng Y, Yu Y, Huang J. Cornea; 2014 Jun; 33(6):576-81. PubMed ID: 24699563 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of topcon optical coherence tomography and ultrasound pachymetry. Northey LC, Gifford P, Boneham GC. Optom Vis Sci; 2012 Dec; 89(12):1708-14. PubMed ID: 23190715 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of central corneal thickness measured by ultrasound pachymetry, corneal topography, spectral domain- optical coherence tomography, and non-contact specular microscopy. Ulutas HG, Ozkaya G, Amuk Hamidi N. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther; 2023 Jun; 42():103527. PubMed ID: 36966866 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Measurement of central corneal thickness by high-resolution Scheimpflug imaging, Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography and ultrasound pachymetry. Chen S, Huang J, Wen D, Chen W, Huang D, Wang Q. Acta Ophthalmol; 2012 Aug; 90(5):449-55. PubMed ID: 20560892 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparative study of central corneal thickness measurement with slit-lamp optical coherence tomography and visante optical coherence tomography. Li H, Leung CK, Wong L, Cheung CY, Pang CP, Weinreb RN, Lam DS. Ophthalmology; 2008 May; 115(5):796-801.e2. PubMed ID: 17916376 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of the precision of the Topcon SP-3000P specular microscope and an ultrasound pachymeter. Almubrad TM, Osuagwu UL, Alabbadi I, Ogbuehi KC. Clin Ophthalmol; 2011 May; 5():871-6. PubMed ID: 21760714 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]